Point of Law: Amendment of pleading - Proposed relief is prejudicial to the rights accrued to the revision petitioner by way of admissions made by the co-defendants in the written statement.

ORDER :

This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the unsuccessful petitioner/1st defendant is directed against the orders dated 14.02.2019, of the learned I Additional District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, passed in IA.No.1253 of 2018 in OS.No.38 of 2014 filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘the Code’, for brevity) allowing the plaintiff to delete the names of defendants 2 to 10 and to amend the plaint.

2. Heard Sri Venkaiah, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner/1st defendant and Sri Damaraju Madhusudhan Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the 1st respondent/plaintiff.

3. The case of the plaintiff in the affidavit filed in support of the request for amendment of the plaint, in brief, is this:

The suit is filed for declaration of title over the plaint schedule property and for possession of the same. When the suit is coming up for trial, on 10.01.2017, the plaintiff came to know that the 10th defendant died leaving behind him his wife and three children. The plaintiff filed applications to set aside the abatement and bring the legal representatives of the deceased 10th defendant on record, along with delay condonation application. The plaint schedule property is part and parcel of a total extent of Ac.34.00 cents. The defendants 1 to 10 are no way concerned with the plaint schedule property of an extent of Ac.1.98 cents in R.S.No.141/1 of Satyavedu. In the meanwhile, the elders intervened in the matter and tried to settle the dispute amicably. Except the 1st defendant who did not appear before the elders, all other defendants agreed for the settlement. In view of the changed circumstances, on 13.08.2018, a Memorandum of Understanding’ was executed between the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 9 and the legal representatives of the deceased 10th defendant. In the circumstances, it has become necessary to seek amendment of the plaint by deleting the names of defendants 2 to 10 from plaint as defendants 2 to 9 and the legal representatives of defendant No.10 are supporting the case of the plaintiff. Hence, the instant application has been filed to delete the names of defendants 2 to 10 and also to permit the plaintiff to waive her claim against the defendants 2 to 10 and to further permit her to seek consequential amendment.

(b) The proposed amendments sought for by the plaintiff are as follows:

(i) Delete the names of defendants 2 to 10 from both the short cause title and long cause title and the words “Defendants” for such cause titles be permitted to amend as “defendant”.

(ii) Wherever the word “1st defendant” is present in the plaint, the same may be permitted to be amended as “defendant”.

(iii) Add the word ‘deleted’ before the word ‘defendants 2 to 10 at 2nd line in para No.6 of the plaint.

(iv) Wherever the word ‘2nd defendant’ appears in the plaint, it be amended as ‘deleted 2nd defendant’

(v) Wherever the word ‘defendants 2 to 10’ or the word ‘defendants 3 to 10’ appears in the main plaint, it be amended as ‘deleted defendants 2 to 10’ and ‘deleted defendants 3 to 10’ respectively.

(vi) Delete the following underlined portion ‘Though the 2nd defendant is maintaining such a fish tank, no share amount is being given to the plaintiff. For which some disputes arose between the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant. It is a fact that the defendants No.3 to 10 are the followers of 2nd defendant. The fact remains that taking advantage of the plaintiff’s loneliness the 2nd defendant hatched up a plan to grab the plaint schedule land, in fact, the 2nd defendant agreed to pay Rs.45,000/- per acre per year. But no single N.P is paid to plaintiff. Whenever the plaintiff personally or through mediators asked about her share, the same is being postponed on one pretext or other from para No.6 and insert the following in such place.

Insert the following in place of the above underline portion in para 6 of main plaint:

‘Though the deleted 2nd defendant is maintaining such fish